LOCAL LAW 11/98 UPDATE PART II

BY ALAN EPSTEIN, PE EPSTEIN ENGINEERING

On April 19, 1999 the Building Industry Advisory Council assembled by the City of New York met relative to the final changes to Local Law 10/80 (The Façade Inspection Law which will now be known as Local Law 11/98). The following summarizes the MAJOR CHANGES, which have been incorporated into the new law and the likely cost impact of such changes. [Part I of this article appeared in the September, 1999 issue. If you would like a copy contact NYARM at 212-505-8770 or LocalLaw11/98@ nyarm.com or visit our website nyarm.com.]

7. Scaffold Inspection

A physical examination from a scaffold or other observation platform is required for a representative sample of the exterior wall. The professional shall determine what constitutes a representative sample. The representative sample must include at least one physical examination along a path from grade to top of an exterior wall on a street front using at least one scaffold drop or other observation platform configuration.

This is anticipated to have a significant impact on the cost of the inspection and in complying with Local Law 11. Engineers/architects will have to physically inspect facades (or at least a portion of the facades) from a scaffold. Scaffold inspections are quite time consuming to perform and, in many instances, extremely difficult. In addition, there are known risks associated with the performance of such inspections. Accordingly, the pool of available consultants is likely to diminish. These factors make it apparent that the costs associated with such inspections will likely be quite significant. Further, a contractor/licensed rigger must be employed during the inspection to provide and operate the scaffolding. This involves equipment, personnel, insurance, etc. costs. It is also quite possible that sidewalk bridging may be required at many locations where scaffold inspections are performed. The need for bridging would increase the time and costs associated with these inspections. At present, there is a shortage in the city of available bridging and as a result the costs of bridging has escalated.

8. Change in Classification of Conditions

There will no longer be precautionary conditions noted in Local Law 11/98 Reports. Conditions which would previously have been designated as precautionary will now be designated as safe with a repair and maintenance program. These conditions will have to be repaired prior to the filing of the next Local Law 11 Report for the building. Accordingly, all conditions noted in a building’s 5^th Cycle Report as being safe with a repair and maintenance program must have these conditions repaired prior to the 6^th Cycle filing. If they are not, they must be classified as unsafe in the 6^th Cycle Report.

Cost Impact

This will result in increased repair costs since conditions which were deemed as precautionary, in the past, did not have a time frame for their repair. Now, under Local Law 11/98 they will all have to be repaired prior to the next Local Law 11 Inspection. They could be monitored from cycle to cycle. This is no longer possible. Accordingly, there will likely be substantial costs (professional fees, contractor cost, bridging cost, etc.) associated with the mandatory repair prior to the next Local Law 11 cycle of conditions noted as safe with a repair and maintenance program. The additional work generated by the need to repair such conditions within specific time frames will likely contribute to shortages in qualified contractors and workers and associated cost increases.

9. Notification Requirements Relative to Unsafe Conditions

Whenever an architect or engineer learns through a critical examination of a building’s exterior walls and appurtenances of an unsafe condition, prior to the filing of a report with the Department of Buildings he or she shall notify the Owner and the Borough Commissioner immediately by letter or fax of such condition. This may trigger the issuance of an "additional" violation by the Department of Buildings for such unsafe conditions. A violation of this nature would be in addition to any violations issued with respect to the filing of the Local Law 11 Report or indications in that report that there are unsafe conditions at the building.

Cost Impact

The notification requirement may result in the Department of Buildings issuing additional violations for unsafe conditions. Upon such issuance, there will likely be hearings, legal expenses, fines, etc. associated with addressing and obtaining dismissal of such violations.

10. Law is to be Effective Immediately

The requirements of this new law have immediate application. Arrangements should be made as soon as possible by building owners and managing agents to retain an engineer or architect to have the inspections performed relative to the buildings having side, rear, courtyard, etc. walls which were never previously inspected. There are many, many buildings which fall into this category. The time period for the filing of reports relative to facades never previously inspected as provided for in this new law is quite short (Deadline is March 1, 2000).

detect splitting or fracturing of terra cotta on buildings, cracking of masonry and brickwork in brick faced buildings, loosening of metal anchors and supports, water entry, movement of lintel angles, etc. and shall ascertain the cause of these and other conditions detected. The professional shall order any special

The removal of portions of the façade in order to facilitate the performance of tests may require a permit from the Landmarks Preservation Commission.

Obtaining permits requires that filings be made with the Landmark Preservation Commission. This entails time on the part of the Local Law 11 consultant to prepare and file the required documentation and follow-up to obtain necessary approvals.

12. Permits

The Department of Buildings has advised that work permits will be required for certain types of Local Law 11 repairwork. The Local Law 11 Report must indicate which repairs and/or maintenance require the obtaining of work permits prior to their commencement. Permits from the Landmarks Preservation Commission will also be required relative to buildings under their jurisdiction. The Department of Buildings has indicated that the following categories of work will likely require a filing for a work permit and the issuance of the permit before they can be performed:

A. Masonry

1. Concrete Restoration

1. Structural repair, reinforcement of concrete (repair of re-bars, post-tension cables, curtain panel wall, pre-cast concrete).
2. Spandrels: repair of cracked or spalled concrete on exterior concrete spandrel beams, concrete fascias or balconies (whether or not repair of deteriorated steel reinforcement is required).

C. Stone/Terra Cotta Restoration

1. Patching of spalls or cracks on exterior stone or terra cotta masonry.

2. Removal and replacement of exterior stone or terra cotta ornamentation with an alternative material.

3. Mechanical anchorage (pinning) of displaced stone or terra cotta masonry to underlying structure.

D. Curtain/Panel Walls

1. Repair, replacements of structural components of panel wall system.

E. Miscellaneous Metal/Steel

F. Sheet Metal

1. Sheet metal cladding of exterior face of parapet wall.

G. Miscellaneous

In such instances, where it is determined that a permit is required to perform needed repair work, the Local Law 11 consultant would have to prepare plans for the repair work and then file the plans and related applications with the Department of Buildings and follow-up to obtain the necessary approvals before a work permit can be issued to a contractor to perform the work. This can be a time consuming process with significant costs attached to it. Accordingly, this reinforces the notion that it would be extremely prudent to have the inspections commence at the earliest possible time.

There will be significant costs associated with the requirement that permits be obtained from the Department of Buildings before the contractor can proceed with the Local Law 11 repair work. Owners will have to retain their consultants to prepare plans, specifications and associated applications and documents for filing with the Department of Buildings and will have to pay their professional fees for such services. Expediting fees will be required relative to filing plans, obtaining approvals, filing for permits, etc. Fees will be due to the Department of Buildings to cover the entire permit application/issuance process. In addition, due to the stringent insurance requirements, which must be met by contractors before they can obtain a permit, the costs associated with this procedure are typically quite significant. In addition, the anticipated substantial volume of needed work combined with the anticipated shortage of available, capable contractors will, as previously noted, likely contribute to further cost increases relative to Local Law 11 compliance.

CONCLUSION

As one can see, Local Law 11 has brought about many significant changes, a number of which will very likely dramatically increase the costs associated with complying with the law. One should proceed with due diligence in arranging for the inspection and the needed repairs at the earliest possible time. Delay will inevitably result in increased costs.

There is no need to panic, however, with respect to this law. By carefully reviewing the law and its application and by planning ahead, compliance should not prove unduly burdensome. It is also important to remember that the law is aimed at providing a safer city for all of us. Clearly, Local Law 10 had that effect during its tenure and it is anticipated that Local Law 11 should, in all likelihood, prove even more effective. The message here should be quite clear, acting early should greatly enhance one’s ability to comply with this law in an economically efficient manner. Delays will likely result in increased costs and greater inconvenience.

Alan S. Epstein, PE, MSCE, Esq. is President and CEO of Epstein Engineering, P.C.

Web Site Production and Design By: